Is Raw for America as less important than Libya? The answer to this question is looking for an editor of the weekly Washington Post Jackson Dyl.
The Obama administration and most of America's European allies are constantly slow to support the Arab revolutionaries. But nowhere is this mlyavasts is not so obvious, more harmful and less justified than in Syria.
Let's start with some facts. The first protest occurred about Umayadav mosque in Damascus on March 15 under the slogan: "God, freedom, Raw." The excitement was soon expanded to the southern city of gifts, and since then, every Friday protest rising. Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets in dozens of cities equal.
The answer mode, from the beginning, was the cruelty, comparable to s actions in Libya, Muammar Gaddafi. March 23, security forces opened fire on a crowd in gifts. Since then, the mass executions of peaceful demonstrators occurred every few days. Total reported more than 700 killed syryytsav. Around 10,000 have been detained, several hundred of them were missing.
Western response: Four days after the first mass execution of State Hillary Clinton called Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad "a reformer." First weak U.S. sanctions were imposed on April 29 — 45 days after the first call to freedom.
On Friday, when the troops were used against the protesters heavy machine guns and artillery, Europe finally joined the sanctions. White House statement threatened further measures, but said that would depend on the actions of the regime — that supposedly has not done enough.
Perhaps most importantly, President Obama has still Assad did not mention what he said about Gaddafi and former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak — that he has to go.
Is Raw less important than Libya? Just opposite: Regional experts agree that Damascus is a key point for the Arab Middle East. If the Assad regime falls, Iran will lose its closest ally and a bridge to the "Hezbollah" in Lebanon and Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip. Iranian shadow empire could collapse; dictatorship in Tehran to get into mortal danger.
No one in Syria is not asking for military intervention in Libya-style, and any other possible actions of the United States and Europe, even joint will not be decisive. But why is so little and so slowly?
I believe that the U.S. policy in Syria fell into the clutches of some of the same factors that have slowed the response of the United States
throughout the Arab uprisings. There is, first of all, an unwillingness to give up conventional ideas about Arab politics and lack of faith in the possibility of revolutionary change. There is anxiety about what might come after the collapse of the dictatorship. And there is a reluctance to get ahead of the allies in the region, which are themselves invested in the status quo.
I have discussed some of these obstacles last week with Avsamam Manaedam, energetic representative of the National Initiative for Change, a coalition of Syrian online activists inside and outside the country. The first problem, in his view, is that the United States "does not have a policy on Syria. They have a policy of settlement in the Middle East, no specific policy on Syria."
Of course, he is right. The policy of "obligations" of the Obama administration regarding Syria was focused on getting results in other countries: peace for Israel, stability in Lebanon, Iran's isolation. One of the reasons why the U.S. is so slow refused to support Assad, was reluctant to drop the perception of Assad, as a figure capable of such achievements.
The bloodshed in the past few weeks, mostly muted the fantasy of "The Siege of the reformer." But there is a fear of what might come after him. An article in the Washington Post with the news last week ended with the generally accepted statement that the fall of the regime "to unleash a cataclysm of chaos, violence and extremism."
Mr. Manaed reasonable to ask: Where is the evidence of this? So far, the protests were not "sectarian strife" — on the contrary, the slogans of demonstrators stressed Syrian unity. Did not appear suicidal al-Qaeda terrorists — just young students and workers who, like people in the Middle East, demand that their countries joined the 21st century. "The only people who talk about religious conflict, it is a regime — says Manaed. — People on the street know that this is a trap, and they are determined not to fall into that trap."
Finally, there are the neighbors with whom Obama has to be considered — Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel. But at least in the latter two countries over the past couple of weeks has been a shift. Is the understanding that Assad can not resist — and that if he did hold out, the regime will be dangerously weak.
"I hope that Washington will realize that even the Israelis knew — that he was leaving — said Manaed. — It would therefore be better for the future now to show at least some signs of support for the Syrian people. We assume that 24 hours before the end of the Washington, Finally, over to his side. "
Better late than never.